Topic: Jesus was crucified according to historia Posted: 28 April 2008 at 3:11pm

No serious historian doubts the existence of Jesus Christ. Atheist scholars and Christians alike acknowledge the reality and impact of his life. But the three great religions with roots in the Middle East—Judaism, Islam and Christianity—divide over the death of Jesus and what it means. The final moment in the life of Jesus—the moment he died--was the all-important moment. That's what this book addresses: What does the Christian Bible teach about why Jesus suffered so much and died?

The Denial by Muslims

Nothing is more relevant or controversial today. Islam affirms that Jesus lived, but most Muslims have been taught that Jesus was not crucified. For example, one Sunni Muslim says, “Muslims believe that Allah saved the Messiah from the ignominy of crucifixion.” [1] Another adds, “We honor [Jesus] more than you [Christians] do. . . . We refuse to believe that God would permit him to suffer death on the cross.” [2]

The place in the Qur'an that provides the basis for this denial of the crucifixion (and resurrection) is a discussion of supposed Jewish errors:

And because of their saying: We slew the Messiah, Jesus son of Mary, Allah's messenger—They slew him not nor crucified, but it appeared so unto them; and lo! those who disagree concerning it are in doubt therefore; they have no knowledge thereof save pursuit of a conjecture; they slew him not for certain. But Allah took him up unto Himself. Allah is ever Mighty, Wise. There is not one of the People of the Scripture [Jews] but will believe in him before his death, and on the Day of Resurrection he will be a witness against them. [3]

The Witness of Non-Christian History

However, those who were much closer to the historical situation than Mohammed (who was born in a.d. 571) reported that Jesus died by crucifixion. These witnesses include non-Christian historians who had no motive to fabricate Christ's death. For example, the Roman historian, Tacitus (who was born in a.d 55), wrote in his Annals (15:44) an explanation of how Nero, the emperor (who died in a.d 68) blamed Christians for the great fire of Rome in order to deflect rumors that he had started the blaze. In this passage Tacitus alludes to a fact which no one disputed: Christ had been crucified under Pontius Pilate:

All human efforts . . . of the emperor, and the propitiations of the gods, did not banish the sinister belief that the conflagration was the result of an order. Consequently, to get rid of the report, Nero fastened the guilt and inflicted the most exquisite tortures on a class hated for their abominations, called Christians by the populace. Christus, from whom the name had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of one of our procurators, Pontius Pilatus , and a most mischievous superstition, thus checked for the moment, again broke out not only in Judea, the first source of the evil, but even in Rome, where all things hideous and shameful from every part of the world find their center and become popular. [4]

It was common and undisputed knowledge in the second half of the first century that Jesus Christ had been crucified. If there were any question that he had died in this way, it would have been eagerly disputed wherever Christians preached. But it wasn't. The fact of his death by crucifixion was not questioned.

Abundant Eyewitnesses and the Absence of Denial

If the death of Jesus was a myth, it had to be created overnight, since within weeks Christians were preaching the saving power of Christ's suffering and death. Even more significant, it was being preached in Jerusalem—the very city which had the greatest interest in making sure the error was stopped. As far as the Jewish leaders were concerned, this new religion was a distortion of the Jewish faith, and, in fact, was blasphemy, since Christians claimed that Jesus was himself the Son of God (Mark 14:61-64). “We have a law,” the Jewish leaders said to Pilate, “and according to that law he ought to die because he has made himself the Son of God” (John 19:7).

The fact is that Christians openly based their faith on the fact that Jesus was publicly tried, condemned, executed, and raised from the dead. They spoke this way within weeks after these events, when thousands of people who opposed this faith could have proved it wrong, if Jesus had not died. They could have gone to Pilate the governor or Herod the king or the Jewish Council or the soldiers or other witnesses of the crucifixion and gotten proof that he had not been condemned or crucified the way Christians said he was. But, in fact, no one did that. Everyone in Jerusalem knew that Jesus had been crucified, and many had watched him die. The resurrection was disputed, but not the crucifixion.

The early Christians were keenly aware that eyewitnesses were crucial in verifying their claims about the death and resurrection of Jesus. Their earliest writer, the apostle Paul, who was a contemporary of Jesus, said, “ Christ died for our sins in accordance with the Scriptures. . . . he was buried . . . he was raised on the third day . . . Then he appeared to more than five hundred brothers at one time, most of whom are still alive” (1 Corinthians 15:3-6). Why did Paul say “most of whom are still alive”? Because he was not afraid to have his claims put to the test. He knew they could be verified by eyewitnesses. In other words, Christianity was spreading during the very decades when eyewitnesses could have most easily proved it false. But the basic claims stood the test. The events had happened.

An Improbable Myth

Moreover why would a group of Jews (for all the first Christians were Jews by birth) fabricate the death of Christ? The Christians had nothing to gain from creating the story of a crucified Messiah. It made the spread of Christianity almost impossible from a natural viewpoint. Crucifixion was an obscene form of torture and execution reserved for despised criminals. Most people, hearing the Christian message that Jesus Christ was the divine Son of God who died by crucifixion, thought it was ludicrous. One of the earliest first-century Christian preachers said, “ We preach Christ crucified, a stumbling block to Jews and folly to Gentiles [that is, non-Jews]” (1 Corinthians 1:23 ). It was not to the advantage of Christians to concoct a crucified Messiah. It made their life and mission much harder.

The Critical Issue of the 21st century

The claim of many Muslims that Christ was never crucified, and that early Christians were mistaken or were myth-makers, goes against all the historical and intuitive evidence. The key issue between Christians and Muslims is not first and foremost the identity of Allah, but the fact and meaning of the death of Jesus Christ. This is also true for Judaism and Christianity: Who was this Jesus and why did he die? Both Judaism and Islam deny the essence of Christianity—that Jesus was the long-expected Messiah, the divine Son of God, who was crucified and raised from the dead to bring forgiveness of sins and eternal life to all who believe in him.

This makes Jesus incredibly relevant and controversial in the 21st century. The massive movement of Islam (over 1.3 billion people), and the comparatively small people of Israel have explosive significance in world affairs. The most critical issue between Islam and Judaism on the one hand, and Christianity on the other, is not whether Islam and Judaism are monotheistic. Nor is the issue whether Islam and Judaism try to honor Jesus. The issue is: Do Islam and Judaism—or any other faiths besides Christianity—cherish the righteous suffering and death of the God-Man, Jesus Christ, as the only ground of our acceptance with God?

The answer to that question is No. Only Christians base their acceptance with God on the death of a crucified, risen, and reigning person. All other faiths reject the unique saving relevance of Jesus Christ. That is the critical issue of the 21st century: What happened between man and God when Jesus Christ died?

The Offense of Jesus' Passion—Then and Now

It was absolutely astonishing to the Roman world after the death of Jesus that Christians were willing to be tortured for faith in a convicted and crucified criminal. If this were a self-created myth, it was suicidal. In his History of Christian Missions , Stephen Neil wrote, “Christians under the Roman Empire had no legal right to existence, and were liable to the utmost stringency of the law. . . . Every Christian knew that sooner or later he might have to testify to his faith at the cost of his life.” [5] All of this because they believed that the crucifixion and resurrection of Jesus Christ was the most important event in the history of the world. The foolishness of the claim was almost insurmountable. And the Christians didn't try to water it down.

The modern (sub)version of Christianity that preaches health, wealth, and prosperity is a cut flower, finally to wither in the arid winds of 21 st century suffering. If what you've seen on television is all you know of Christianity, you may never have seen the real thing. If you want to know the true Christ, read the New Testament. Those who market him today with the bait of money and success have severed their roots in the crucified Christ. His way was different: “If anyone would come after me, let him deny himself and take up his cross daily and follow me” (Luke 9:23).

The early church knew that crucifixion was not just the experience of her Lord, but also a personal summons to sacrificial love. The fading of Christianity from cultural mainstream Western culture in the last 50 years is a dose of early church normalcy. Cultural Christianity has become a curse. It is time for the wheel of history to turn and the Christian church to discover the implications of her founder's finest hour, namely, his last.

[1] Badru D. Kateregga and David W. Shenk, Islam and Christianity: A Muslim and a Christian in Dialogue (Nairobi: Usima Press, 1980), 141.

I would suggest you to learn Arabic, if you are not satisfied with the translations.

beleiver, this issue has been discussed before. As a Muslim let me clarify, that for a Muslim, the Quran is the word of God, and thus is the authority. We trust and submitt to the truth sent by God. For us their is not a tiny chance of doubt what it tells us about this issue.

I will ask you to respect other's believe as they respect yours. Also present your point let others present theirs and that's it. There is no other purpose but to bring out facts. Let people decide for themselves without compulsion and distortion.

The Quran speaks clearly of Jesus(pbuh) being a man, a prophet a word from God. It also states that Jesus was raised by God to Himself, so not be humiliated, and crusified by disbelievers who thought to have power to do so. Thus God rescued and saved His beloved prophet and servent from the hands of disbelievers.

We Muslims do not deny Jesus (pbuh), we deny what non-Mulsims associate with him.

I can understand, from a Christian's perspective, denying that "Christ died for your sins" is the end of it. You have nothing left to sell??

We Muslims more so celebrate lives of the prophets not their deaths.

We believe it was their life that brought humanity the salvation, not their deaths. Death is a reality anyway for all of those who are born, according to the Quran, and so was Jesus, son of Mary.

You may disagree with me, and you ae welcome to do so.

Hasan

Edited by honeto - 01 May 2008 at 3:24pm

39:64 Proclaim: Is it some one other than God that you order me to worship, O you ignorant ones?"

Are we absolutely sure that Muslims are interpreting the Quran writings accurately? Has it been translated correctly?

This no place to let John Piper's Christian hedonism find roots? This evangelical preacher is no different than others in the heap of an anti Islamic crowd. What part of the sign he doesn't understand? Why is he quoting from Pickthall? he could go and read in Arabic and come back then!The Quran is a go - no go gauge of the of quality assurance in divine revelations!So far Chapter 4 sign 157-159 is concerned it is quite explicit that Allah has the power to show what He wanted to show to blood thirsty Jews to make their lives even more sinister! Think if Jesus had a what the Jews would do to him for a having son who told them what to do!You can't tell a Jew what to think and do if you mention to him about his wrong doing.You tell me what wrong business they are not in today? Every presidential candidate is beholden to them at this moment!Why?And a Jew named Saul who wasn't on the scene did that by creating a new cult based on the purported show of crucifixion! And that concept was no different than the Mithraism in many details! Instead of casting stone at the Muslim's understanding of the Quranic meanings you need to understand one comparative difference between Jesus and Muhammad's apostleships that former was shrouded in mystery while the later was in the full view of the world history with minutest details. The west can't buy that just cuz it was a party to that history as a loser. Now when the west has been successful in dismantling the nemesis politically; is on the rampage to question the Quranic absolutes!Just think the evangelistic driven president W with his bunch of liars; with full availability of all resources, the people were manipulated to believe all the lies for invading Iraq. Then kept changing the justification about Iraqi which rather is a crusade in disguise albeit a Judeo Christian monstrosity cuz they found takers in the Anglo American audience? Same is true for the Jesus story the perfect fit for the western hedonism that they want a cover for all their evil ways!

I didn't know that Muslims celebrate Jesus' birthday. What special things do you do and what date do you observe it?

beleiver,

Arabic, I can read and write quite a bit, but not completely. I do not know the language though, I wish I did.

I reccomended for you to learn Arabic, because you seem to have problem with the translations. I don't have that problem.

As far as celebrating the birthday of prophet Jesus (pbuh), no we don't celebrate it. What I was saying was that we don't see a prophets death as a good thing as you do, rather their coming into this world as our guides as a blessing from God. Their lives were for a purpose, to guide us out of error and into the right direction. They died or went back to God when their life on earth finished and were called back, as we all must return to Him one day when our time finishes.

Let me make it easy for you to understand. Just like you don't celebrate birthdays of any pevious prophets, like Yahya (John the Baptist), Moses or Abraham (pbut) simply because you don't know nor we when were they born. Same way for us Jesus (pbuh) is a prophet of the past, There is no authentic record of his birth date. Prophet Mohammed (pbuh) is our last prophet, and we celebrate his birthday. We celebrate it not the same way though as you do of the Christ, and its not the biggest holiday in Islam.

Hasan

Edited by honeto - 02 May 2008 at 6:53pm

39:64 Proclaim: Is it some one other than God that you order me to worship, O you ignorant ones?"

No serious historian doubts the existence of Jesus Christ. Atheist scholars and Christians alike acknowledge the reality and impact of his life. But the three great religions with roots in the Middle East—Judaism, Islam and Christianity—divide over the death of Jesus and what it means. The final moment in the life of Jesus—the moment he died--was the all-important moment. That's what this book addresses: What does the Christian Bible teach about why Jesus suffered so much and died?

The Denial by Muslims

Nothing is more relevant or controversial today. Islam affirms that Jesus lived, but most Muslims have been taught that Jesus was not crucified. For example, one Sunni Muslim says, “Muslims believe that Allah saved the Messiah from the ignominy of crucifixion.” [1] Another adds, “We honor [Jesus] more than you [Christians] do. . . . We refuse to believe that God would permit him to suffer death on the cross.” [2]

The place in the Qur'an that provides the basis for this denial of the crucifixion (and resurrection) is a discussion of supposed Jewish errors:

And because of their saying: We slew the Messiah, Jesus son of Mary, Allah's messenger—They slew him not nor crucified, but it appeared so unto them; and lo! those who disagree concerning it are in doubt therefore; they have no knowledge thereof save pursuit of a conjecture; they slew him not for certain. But Allah took him up unto Himself. Allah is ever Mighty, Wise. There is not one of the People of the Scripture [Jews] but will believe in him before his death, and on the Day of Resurrection he will be a witness against them. [3]

Even Christians beleive that Jesus was resurrected, also a scheme that included the "error" of the Jews who wanted him executed. I find the skeptical impilication of the word chosen by the mentally challenged author to be of great humour, "supposed Jewish errors".

The Witness of Non-Christian History

However, those who were much closer to the historical situation than Mohammed (who was born in a.d. 571) reported that Jesus died by crucifixion.

Revelation gives a more accurate account, hence it is almost nonsensical to say that 571 ACE would not be as accurate as 100-300 ACE. A "historical" account near the source is only as good as the reliablity of the witness, which in this case if the myriad of MSS that floated around dervived from unknown authors.

These witnesses include non-Christian historians who had no motive to fabricate Christ's death. For example, the Roman historian, Tacitus (who was born in a.d 55), wrote in his Annals (15:44) an explanation of how Nero, the emperor (who died in a.d 68) blamed Christians for the great fire of Rome in order to deflect rumors that he had started the blaze. In this passage Tacitus alludes to a fact which no one disputed: Christ had been crucified under Pontius Pilate:

All human efforts . . . of the emperor, and the propitiations of the gods, did not banish the sinister belief that the conflagration was the result of an order. Consequently, to get rid of the report, Nero fastened the guilt and inflicted the most exquisite tortures on a class hated for their abominations, called Christians by the populace. Christus, from whom the name had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of one of our procurators, Pontius Pilatus , and a most mischievous superstition, thus checked for the moment, again broke out not only in Judea, the first source of the evil, but even in Rome, where all things hideous and shameful from every part of the world find their center and become popular. [4]

Tacitus did not write as a first handwittness to the "alleged" event, he simply wore what others said about the group in question. In other words, this cannot be used as a historical witness, and no true historian would make this claim. It is simply another unvalidated, and unverifable writing from the first century that does not allow us to have any close look from a historical view.

It was common and undisputed knowledge in the second half of the first century that Jesus Christ had been crucified. If there were any question that he had died in this way, it would have been eagerly disputed wherever Christians preached. But it wasn't. The fact of his death by crucifixion was not questioned.

The author has just tried to hood wink us. The first assertion is simply that, an assertion, which has a conclusion that was given by nothing more than a "handwave". Since the majortiy of what as actually circuylated is not gone, one can only make such a claim about the traditions that have been preserved. This silly claim takes the odd assumption that what we have now is exactly what everyone read, practiced, and followed. Modern research tells us that the old sunday school fable about how "real" Christianity has been the same going all the way back to the apostles is pure rubbish.

Abundant Eyewitnesses and the Absence of Denial

If the death of Jesus was a myth, it had to be created overnight, since within weeks Christians were preaching the saving power of Christ's suffering and death.

the conclusion "it had to be created overnight" is nothing mroe than juvenile handwaving. It does not follow from the premise, and it begs the question: How do you know what was taught within weeks. The answer: The quthor does not have a real clue. And this is why he just "handwaved" the conclusion.

Even more significant, it was being preached in Jerusalem—the very city which had the greatest interest in making sure the error was stopped.

1) Islam does not teach that a "crucifiction" did not necessarily take place, it simply says that Jesus did not die in the event.

2) Many things were being taught in late second temple period. MOdern research tells us that your tenents were only a drop in the bubket of the on going beliefs of the day. So once more, proof needs to be shown, and argued, that your tenants were the only core teaching being spread. Assumpions do not count.

As far as the Jewish leaders were concerned, this new religion was a distortion of the Jewish faith, and, in fact, was blasphemy, since Christians claimed that Jesus was himself the Son of God (Mark 14:61-64). “We have a law,” the Jewish leaders said to Pilate, “and according to that law he ought to die because he has made himself the Son of God” (John 19:7).

Argue that the book of John is a verifiable, and an authenticated witness to Jesus. (Not that I agree with the interpretation, but why argue about something that cannot even be authentocated with even the slighets of confidence?)

The fact is that Christians openly based their faith on the fact that Jesus was publicly tried, condemned, executed, and raised from the dead.

Bold. That is not a fact.

They spoke this way within weeks after these events, when thousands of people who opposed this faith could have proved it wrong, if Jesus had not died.

Prove it.

They could have gone to Pilate the governor or Herod the king or the Jewish Council or the soldiers or other witnesses of the crucifixion and gotten proof that he had not been condemned or crucified the way Christians said he was.

Why?

But, in fact, no one did that. Everyone in Jerusalem knew that Jesus had been crucified, and many had watched him die. The resurrection was disputed, but not the crucifixion.

A cricifiction does not imply that Jesus did or did not die from it.

There are not enough witnesses from the period to give us an accurate account.

An Improbable Myth

Moreover why would a group of Jews (for all the first Christians were Jews by birth) fabricate the death of Christ?

Strawman argument, no one has argued otherwise.

The Christians had nothing to gain from creating the story of a crucified Messiah.

Irrelevant. It has nothing to do with what gain they might. or might not have had. A tradition may or may not offer a gain if believed in. A tradition can be embraced without any change of benefit between the believer and the tradition. In this case, the crucifiction was the element to explain the means for God to forgive us. So the above statement is really irrelevant and does not touch upon the actual scenerio. In fact, it is much of a strawman.

It made the spread of Christianity almost impossible from a natural viewpoint. Crucifixion was an obscene form of torture and execution reserved for despised criminals.

Complete rubbish. The crucifiction was the means for the godman to sacrifice himself as a means to forgive humanity of sin. Jesus, according to your tradition, was not a common criminal (his crime was not "common"), and the entire symbolim written into the Christian mythos was one of "sacrifice" to bring about redemption. The context makes the above statement into nonsense.

Most people, hearing the Christian message that Jesus Christ was the divine Son of God who died by crucifixion, thought it was ludicrous. One of the earliest first-century Christian preachers said, “ We preach Christ crucified, a stumbling block to Jews and folly to Gentiles [that is, non-Jews]” (1 Corinthians 1:23 ). It was not to the advantage of Christians to concoct a crucified Messiah. It made their life and mission much harder.

The Jews rejected yuour accounts because

1) Paul committed willful distortions of the TANAKH, something gentiles would not pick up on.

2) The gospels were full of "willful" distortions to manipulate the TANAKH into validating the "replacement theology" spouted by the church.

3) The real audience were pagans, who were quite familiar with godmen, gods fathering children, and mystery religions that were full of symbols about resurrection

The Critical Issue of the 21st century

The claim of many Muslims that Christ was never crucified, and that early Christians were mistaken or were myth-makers, goes against all the historical and intuitive evidence.

Funny. The author provided not a single ounce of evidence fromt he historical evidence he claims exists.

The key issue between Christians and Muslims is not first and foremost the identity of Allah, but the fact and meaning of the death of Jesus Christ. This is also true for Judaism and Christianity: Who was this Jesus and why did he die? Both Judaism and Islam deny the essence of Christianity—that Jesus was the long-expected Messiah, the divine Son of God, who was crucified and raised from the dead to bring forgiveness of sins and eternal life to all who believe in him.

This makes Jesus incredibly relevant and controversial in the 21st century. The massive movement of Islam (over 1.3 billion people), and the comparatively small people of Israel have explosive significance in world affairs. The most critical issue between Islam and Judaism on the one hand, and Christianity on the other, is not whether Islam and Judaism are monotheistic. Nor is the issue whether Islam and Judaism try to honor Jesus. The issue is: Do Islam and Judaism—or any other faiths besides Christianity—cherish the righteous suffering and death of the God-Man, Jesus Christ, as the only ground of our acceptance with God?

My God does not have to send Himself through a vagine, use the toiler, walk around, ans then preach for a few years, and then commit suicide so He can be a perfect sacrifice for Himself in order to forgive man of sin.

The TANAKH does not indicate any need to change the system in place for seeking resolution with God, hence there is no need for God to send Himself to die for man so that man can seek atonement with God. It is simply absurd, and makes no sense. And God must also suffer? This is such a convoluted theology, I am truly amazed that many Christian proudly revel in this story. My God does not need to suffer, and He is capable of forgiving my sins without Him having to be born to die.

The rest of the piece is simply an intellectual waste of time. The author offers no further direction that seeks to prove what he claims.

Edited by Andalus - 02 May 2008 at 11:56pm

A feeling of discouragement when you slip up is a sure sign that you put your faith in deeds. -Ibn 'Ata'llah
http://www.sunnipath.com
http://www.sunniforum.com/forum/
http://www.pt-go.com/

LOL!! Anadulas - you are not proving your stance, just dismissing each with comedic comments.

You say revelation most important- the Gospel which the Quran verifies says Jesus was crucified.

What is your understanding of the verses? What since Ishmael/Isaac was not sacrificed is the tremendous sacrifice? Who was the victim? What ransom?

037.103YUSUFALI: So when they had both submitted their wills (to Allah), and he had laid him prostrate on his forehead (for sacrifice), PICKTHAL: Then, when they had both surrendered (to Allah), and he had flung him down upon his face, SHAKIR: So when they both submitted and he threw him down upon his forehead,

037.104YUSUFALI: We called out to him "O Abraham! PICKTHAL: We called unto him: O Abraham! SHAKIR: And We called out to him saying: O Ibrahim!

037.105YUSUFALI: "Thou hast already fulfilled the vision!" - thus indeed do We reward those who do right. PICKTHAL: Thou hast already fulfilled the vision. Lo! thus do We reward the good. SHAKIR: You have indeed shown the truth of the vision; surely thus do We reward the doers of good:

037.106YUSUFALI: For this was obviously a trial- PICKTHAL: Lo! that verily was a clear test. SHAKIR: Most surely this is a manifest trial.

037.107YUSUFALI: And We ransomed him with a momentous sacrifice: PICKTHAL: Then We ransomed him with a tremendous victim. SHAKIR: And We ransomed him with a Feat sacrifice.

John 3
16"For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life.

You cannot post new topics in this forumYou cannot reply to topics in this forumYou cannot delete your posts in this forumYou cannot edit your posts in this forumYou cannot create polls in this forumYou cannot vote in polls in this forum

Disclaimer:
The opinions expressed herein contain positions and viewpoints that are not necessarily those of IslamiCity. This forum is offered to stimulate dialogue and discussion in our continuing mission of being an educational organization.
If there is any issue with any of the postings please email to icforum at islamicity.com or if you are a forum's member you can use the report button.